Inside ML

Electronic advertising

"You would sell your soul for a few lousy bucks?" wrote one reader. "What a tacky mockery of our symbol of Christ as the light of the world," wrote another. "Gross," wrote another. I received a total of five letters -- which is a lot -- regarding an ad for electric vigil lights in the May issue (ML 25:4).

One writer said, "Putting stuff like that in your magazine implicitly says you must think it's okay, and I rather doubt that." This is the crux of the issue. Does "putting stuff like that" in ML imply that ML "must think it's okay"?

ML's policy is to sell ad space to those who request it. The publication of an ad is not an endorsement of the product. It would be unrealistic for the ML staff to try to evaluate all the products that appear in the magazine. How could such an evaluation even be attempted? Should all products be submitted to a review panel to evaluate their orthodoxy? Suppose only the really "gross" ads were refused, the ones that are clearly not in line with the editorial content of ML. Would that be a good idea? If that were the case, what would readers think about ads that did get in? Would readers begin to assume all the advertised products had some kind of ML stamp of approval?

If ML were confronted with the problem, I am sure some advertising could be rejected -- ads for products the staff knew were fraudulent, or ads that urge immoral actions, or ads that promote ideas such as racism, torture or pornography.

In general, however, ML's strategy is to believe in the intelligence and taste of ML readers. The editors and writers try to inform the community with solid editorial material. The choice of what to print in the editorial space makes clear what the editorial position of the magazine is (for example, see Paul Turner's Bulletin Insert on "Candles" in the June* July issue [25:5]). Most people, including those who wrote about the electric candle ad, know the difference between editorial endorsement and paid ads.

I'd like to show you the letters I got, but most of the writers asked that their comments not be published. It's difficult to have a conversation without your help. If you think there is nothing to discuss, note that the controversial ad appears again in this issue - - because at least some of you bought electric candles after you saw the ad.

Why do you hate electric candles? Why do you like them? Do you have them in your church? Do you agree with the church's "ban" on them? Write to ML, 160 E. Virginia St. #290, San Jose, CA 95112. E-mail: MODERN LITURGY.
Or join the discussion at http://www.rpinet.com/ml/.

What do YOU Think?
Send an e-mail to ML Editor
or post an entry on the ML Current Issue Discussion Board. (All submissions become the property of RPI and may be edited for length.)